Village of Long Grove
Plan Commission
Chairman
Present: Fred Phillips
Commissioners Present: Joseph Di
Iorio, Nicholas Fasano, Camy Gould, Robert Jenkins, and Lisa Phillips.
Commissioners Absent: Ed Acuna and Michael Dvorak
Also Present: Village Planner
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Fred Phillips
called the meeting to order at
2. MINUTES OF
There were a number of
changes made to the draft meeting minutes from
3. Continued Public Hearing For a Text Amendment and Special
Use Permit to Operate a Day Care Center for Approximately 22 Children Within
the Existing Residence Located at 7155 RFD (Lot #29 Towner Subdivision),
Submitted by Dmitriy Makhovik.
Attorney, Elliott Hartstein
representing the petitioner, was present and discussed the potential
project. Specifically, the two
alternative parking/drop-off options, plan A and plan B, that were distributed
to the Plan Commission were discussed.
Mr. Hartstein outlined the history of how this petition arrived at the
two plans that were before the Plan Commission at this time. He stated that both plans met all the Village
requirements. Mr. Hartstein indicated
that Plan A had been slightly revised to include an area to the west of the
proposed parking lot that would allow a vehicle to reverse to the west outside
of the drive aisle that was located to the east.
This was an initial concern
of the Village Staff with plan A and would have the effect of eliminating some
conflicts between vehicles entering and leaving the proposed parking lot. Mr. Hartstein requested that the Plan
Commission make a recommendation based on the two submitted plans.
Commissioner Gould generally
preferred plan A to plan B. She asked
the petitioner how the drop-off of the children would occur? She asked the petitioner if the third tree
illustrated on the proposed plan would have to be removed and the petitioner
commented that the tree would have to be removed. Commissioner Gould also asked the petitioner
if the parking spaces complied with the Village Code and the petitioner
commented that they would.
Commissioner Jenkins favored
neither plan A or plan B and passed out a concept plan that he had designed
himself to the Plan Commission and the petitioner. He felt that it was very important for the
Plan Commission members to go to the proposed location and view the
parking/drop-off area from a practical standpoint.
Mr. Hartstein commented that
he thought the concept plan as designed by Commissioner Jenkins would not work
at this location.
Commissioner Fasano overall
prefers the plan A concept plan. He
stated that the concept plan only included parking and did not include any
drop-off area as testified by the petitioner.
He suggested that the petitioner might consider using four parking
spaces rather than five for safety purposes and this would provide more space
for vehicles to turn around at this location.
He had some concerns with the height and subsequent visibility due to
the hedges and other similar material close to Route 83 and felt that these
materials blocked visibility and should either be substantially trimmed or
removed entirely. Commissioner Fasano
asked the petitioner what the concrete circular structure that is located in
the front yard was?
Mr. Hartstein responded that
he did not know what the concrete structure in the front yard was.
Commissioner Lisa Phillips
stated that she would prefer the plan provided by Commissioner Jenkins over the
others the petitioner provided and would like to see the petitioner provide a
plan for the safe transport of children to and from the building and their
vehicles, even if it required using space not previously considered. Her concerns were specifically in regards to
safety. She noted that the remaining
concerns are about safety and not parking.
She asked what the petitioner would do if all the children are dropped
off at the proposed facility at the same time?
Mr. Hartstein believes both
of the two concept plans will accommodate all parking and drop-offs. Commissioner Lisa Phillips does not think
either concept plan would safely accommodate the proposed number of cars.
Commissioner Di Iorio had
the same concerns as Commissioner Lisa Phillips. Overall he stated a preference for plan A and
felt that the addition of 5 parking spaces was appropriate. He had some ideas concerning the parking of
cars 2 deep and possibly moving 2 parking spaces to the rear of the building.
Commissioner Gould suggested
moving the parking and drive aisle to the rear of the building and possibly add
parking to the west side of the building by parking staff vehicles first and
then double-loading the parking spaces with the parents’ cars.
Mr. Hartstein did not want
to relocate the parking and drive aisle to the rear of the building because
this is where the play area and septic area are located. Also in response to the double-loading of
parking spaces, Mr. Hartstein had a
concern with safety with this proposal.
Village Manager Lothspeich
was in the audience and presented a concept idea that involved double-loading
parking spaces.
Village Planner Cage stated
that whichever plan is submitted by the petitioner, that this plan must be to a
commonly used scale, must be a full-size plan and must be submitted in a manner
that allows staff time to review the plan prior to the next available Plan
Commission meeting.
Mr. Hartstein stated in
response that they did not want to draft a scaled plan if it was simply going
to be changed in the future by the Plan Commission and asked for some direction
as to which plan, A or B the Plan Commission preferred.
Commissioner Fasano
requested that a professional design and draft the parking/drop-off area on a
scaled plan.
Chairman Fred Phillips
suggested that the Plan Commission give the petitioner some direction on which
of the two option plans they preferred.
Commissioner Gould preferred
plan A. Commissioner Jenkins preferred a
variation of plan B. Commissioner Fasano
preferred plan A. Commissioner Lisa
Phillips preferred neither plan A or B and had a preference for the concept
plan as illustrated by Village Manager Lothspeich. Commissioner Di Iorio preferred a variation
on plan B with the parking moved to the rear of the building. Chairman Fred Phillips had an overall
preference for plan A with maybe a sixth parking space. Commissioner Acuna was not present but had
indicated to Village Planner Cage that if he had to choose between plan A and
plan B that overall he had a preference for plan A. Commissioner Dvorak was not present.
Commissioner Gould reminded
the petitioner that a full-sized scaled plan drafted by a professional was
requested.
Mr. Hartstein requested the
ability to use the escrow funds on deposit with the Village to fund the scaled
plan.
Village Manager Lothspeich
stated that the escrow funds are used by the Village to review plans only and
not for the design of plans.
Commissioner Gould requested
that a landscape plan be submitted with the scaled plan. Village Planner Cage suggested that the
scaled plan could include the existing landscaping at this location.
Commissioner Jenkins
requested that the septic system be illustrated on the scaled plan.
Commissioner Di Iorio
motioned that the Plan Commission continue this public hearing to the
4. Public Hearing for a Potential Text Amendment that would
allow for the Illumination of Subdivision Signs.
The public hearing was
opened by Chairman Fred Phillips. There
were no members of the audience present for this public hearing and therefore
were no public comments.
Commissioner Lisa Phillips
had a concern on the internal illumination of such signs and the types of sign
materials used.
Village Planner Cage
described the process for such signage requests before the Architectural Board
and explained that this potential text amendment had been discussed at a
previous Plan Commission meeting but that holding a formal public hearing was
important to process this request.
Commissioner Gould motioned
that the Plan Commission approve the Text Amendment that would allow for the
illumination of subdivision signs as outlined in the Staff Report dated August
19, 2003, Commissioner Jenkins seconded.
Ayes, all. Nays, none, motion
carried.
5. Continued
Public Hearing For the
Consideration of a Text Amendment That Would Permit Outdoor Dining and Patios
as Either Permitted Uses or Special Uses Within the B-1 Historic Business District
and B-2 Suburban Business District.
There was continued discussion
on the revised draft ordinance on the potential text amendment regarding
outdoor dining.
Commissioner Gould and
Commissioner Lisa Phillips had some concerns with item #6 and that it could
possibly limit ambient lighting.
Commissioner Lisa Phillips
had a concern on item #7 and felt that it might be to limiting and should be
reviewed by the Plan Commission and the Village Board. Some suggested wording for item #7 was “Any
impact on the required parking for the property, upon which the outdoor dining
is located, must be approved by the Village Board.”
There was some discussion on
item #2 and the number of patrons and tables permitted under the temporary use
and the overall consensus was that 6 tables and 24 patrons was the most
appropriate. The proposed changes were
to be made to the draft ordinance and brought back to the Plan Commission at a
future special meeting for further review.
Commissioner Jenkins
motioned that the Plan Commission table this public hearing to the next
available Special Plan Commission Meeting, Commissioner Fasano seconded. Ayes, all.
Nays, none, motion carried.
6. Other
Business.
Chairman Fred Phillips
raised the issue of creating a senior housing zoning district.
Commissioner Fasano took a
list of telephone numbers and e-mail addresses and will put this information
into a list for the Plan Commission use.
There was some discussion on
both the times and dates for meetings and the need to be more productive at the
special meetings. The next regular Plan
Commission meeting is set for
7. New Business – Next Regular Meeting
- Tuesday,
8. Adjournment
Motion to adjourn by
Commissioner Jenkins, seconded by Commissioner Fasano.
Meeting adjourned at
Respectfully submitted by,
Village Planner
Village of Long Grove